Reply With Quote
Resign him. How much? Whatever amount he's worth in two years.
I doubt it will happen.
Resign him. How much? Whatever amount he's worth in two years.
I was going to say that if you think Manu is going to take a paycut you're an idiot, but considering it's you, well...
And Manu will not be traded. Neither will Tony. The big three are going nowhere. Unless they specifically go up to Pop and ask to be traded, they're staying here.
Manu will retire as a spur,He have said it many times, and maybe that's what Pop and The Spurs FO have told him it's gonna happen.
I wouldn't be sorprised if Manu ends up working for the Spurs organization after retiring, and the same for Timmy.
BTW, lame thread.
1. Manu is not Hispanic. He is Spanish-speaking, but his lineage is Caucasian.
2. Manu is not going to be traded this year. Nor should he be traded this year. *IF* Manu comes back severely hampered by the Olympics, and the Spurs are unable to win a le in 2009, then maybe you look at trading him next summer. But more than likely, in 2010, he either re-signs for a smaller, reduced contract, retires, or signs somewhere else -- depending on how his body is holding up by then. Manu will always have value to the Spurs as long as he can play - whether it is for 10 min or 35 min - because offensively he's a sparkplug and he's a tenacious defender.
Manu will be resigned to an extension before his contracts runs out.
End of thread.
Why is extending Manu a no brainer? While he has some strong positives, he has the following negatives:
1. He has made some dumb decisions on at least 2 occasions which has cost the Spurs the opportunity to repeat. At this stage of his career he is who he is and he is not suddenly going to turn into a cerebral Horry type as he gets older. As much as people might not like it, Manu is likely to decline significantly over the next 3-5 years. Giving him a 3 year extension at anything above the MLE will be a major risk but he will never sign for that amount.
2. He MAY be breaking down and becoming injury prone.
3. Postponing resigning him to after the 2009 season is a MAJOR risk as he could get a major offer from Europe which the Spurs could not match so they essentially could lose him for nothing.
That is why I believe that trading Manu for a potential star while he still has high value would be the best decision for the Spurs. Yes, any player the Spurs get back now would be unlikely to immediately match Manu's impact when he is healthy and in form. However, at least 3 and probably more of the current restricted free agents from the draft 4 years ago are likely to be better players over the next 5 years than Manu will be.
Manu is our John Havlichek. He will stay until the TIM era is done. When Tim leaves all bets are off! Back to being the Spurs before David.
Could you name the one that didn't have to due with Dirk '06? Cuz I think you're referring to this past postseason. I hope not, because how does going for AN OPEN DUNK cons ute as a bad decision? He landed odd, and the Spurs were eventually exposed. Can he help it the FO hasn't gotten ANYONE to help him out? I'm hoping Mason works well in the system, but he's the next Barry, not the next Manu.
Manu is simultaneously one of the best and dumbest basketball players alive.
He will still be one of my all-time favorites.
Manu is our energy guy, full of offensive and defensive hustle. That's why he is so vital to our system. But it's also why sometimes his steals become turnovers and his physical play turns into fouls. It's all the same movements, same energy, same decision-making, but sometimes it gets interpreted one way, sometimes another. And you have to live with that.
In terms of whether Manu is breaking down - well, it is possible. But the Spurs aren't going to give up all that he gives the team (and that is a lot) unless it's really clear that's happening, and right now it's not.
easy question . the money Cuban has is big enough to own 5 NBA teams . basically, NBA is not a business to him ,but a only a game .
Houston ------> Scola
Uhh...we could keep him.
I don't think it's an issue of either extending Manu or trading him -- at least it isn't at this point.
I also don't get the idea of accepting pennies on the dollar for a player of Manu's caliber, just for the sake of moving him along. The Spurs plan isn't -- nor should it be -- to try to build a roster that will contend when Tim Duncan retires. That plan would essentially do little more than ensure mediocrity, since teams don't generally win without either megastars or a slew of guys with lottery talent (spare me the '04 Pistons -- half of that roster was lottery picks). The notion that the Spurs are going to somehow sustain their status as an elite club after Tim retires is nonsensical to me.
If you're going to move Manu, you have to get a real talent back for him -- or real assets that will offset the talent loss you'll endure by sending Manu out. To me, that means a young player with skills that are similar to Manu's (as I suggested yesterday, a Kevin Martin type) or acquiring the rights to lottery picks and getting some significant expiring contract. The problem is, as others have suggested, that if the rationale for trading Manu is that he's breaking down, nobody in the league will pay that sort of price for him and the Spurs will ultimately get screwed in any trade. Of course, if Manu is an asset that is worth an equal player, there's no reason to deal him. He was, after all, good enough in 2007-08 to finish 10th in the MVP voting, be voted 3rd team All-NBA, and be (to a real extent) the deciding factor in his club's ability to reach the Conference Finals. Those guys don't just grow on trees -- particularly those sorts of guys who have the sort of character and fire that Manu Ginobili has.
And spare me this notion that Manu has shown himself to be a selfish bas by choosing to play in the Olympics. It's clear to me that Manu agonized over that decision and that he took to heart the wishes of his primary employer. I'm sure he understands that there are risks. But I wouldn't ever want to see Manu changing the way that he plays basketball just because there are risks. I don't think you can begrudge him the once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to defend a gold medal and to be the face of his nation at the Olympic games. I hope he doesn't get hurt, but I don't think his priorities are out of whack because he decided to take that opportunity.
lmao. He is the leading scorer for the spurs, and he is an all star and he is only getting paid 8m a year. Scrubs like kenyon martin gets paid 14 m.
He hasn't made the all star team in two years. Got one all star gift apperance (to bring in the foreign fans) when other players were more deserving with better stats.
He has made an All-NBA team.
Frankly, I think being Third Team All-NBA >>>>>>>>> Western Conference All-Star.
And did not get to go this year when he was far more diserving than others. He even had the stats this time, the ones you think are crucial to be an AS.
Euthanize him and tell the Spurs fans that he went back home to a ranch in Argentina where he chases rabbits all day. Sign some washed up swing man to vet min. Use money saved by this move to invest in oil futures. Give said proceeds to me.
coaches must not thought he was worthy
I guess they know nothing compared to the smeagol
oh I guess that proves you are the stupid one
Question: What to do with Manu?
Answer: Nothing!!!!!!
Next topic.......
yep he can do whatever he wants
he can tell pop I am the boss and do what he wants
I agree with some of the logic behind the suggestion to trade Manu now, but I don't think it will happen for a number of reasons, and that's probably for the best. But his style of play, ankle and age makes it a legitmate thought, however improbable.
There are two major things that make trading Manu a deal breaker, and neither is the shortsighted "he's Manu, so it's not even worth talking about" argument.
The first deal breaker is the 2010 plan. Any trade would have to keep the plan in play. The second deal breaker is Manu's value. He's the third best shooting guard on the planet, with tremendous heart and championship know-how. If the Spurs were to trade Manu they'd have to get back an All-Star quality player (with more years left in his career than Manu), a promising youngter, and a good draft pick. And the contracts would have to work. And the incoming players must fit the Spur character profile. And the incoming players would have to make sense in terms of the Spur roster. Bringing back an All Star point, for example, doesn't make any sense at all.
It's an almost impossible scenario.
If you can't that kind of package in return, it's better to extend Manu and cross one's fingers that his body holds up.
Ironically, trading away an elite player is sometimes more of a help for the sending than the receivng franchise. See, 76ers, Philadelphia. But usually, it's just stupid.
Last edited by tav1; 07-23-2008 at 02:03 PM.
But he did drop couple 40 point games after all star break.
Again, instead of being among the Top 12 players in the West at mid-season (and really, among the 7 best players not elected to that team at that point), Manu was simply one of the 6 best guards in the league for the duration of the season.
I can see where not being an All-Star is really indicative of Manu not being an elite player.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
